Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
? can we do it in january? >> guest: well, i would argue that there are two pieces to the fiscal cliff in that you have to do amt this year, and you -- because unless you really intend people to pay that additional tax. it would be very hard in the middle of the tax filing system to reverse that decision. now, you are, i think, correct in the second piece of the fiscal cliff. that is the tax rates that will apply next year. arguably, you don't have to take action this year, you have the whole of next year during which you can reach resolution to that issue. now, the only reason why i think that's an extraordinarily bad idea is i think it would be viewed quite unfavorably by the financial markets. and so you could see a reaction. and it is really bad tax policy to be legislating in the middle of the tax year on the basic structure of the income tax for that year. >> host: we'll go to jeff in tampa, florida, independent caller. >> caller: good morning, how you doing? >> host: good morning, sir. >> caller: yes, i have a question for mr. buckley, and this is more -- it may be a little gene
what happens if we go off this fiscal cliff. it's a spending decision and a tax decision, but i list them both up here. this chart comes from the congressional research service. a couple interesting things i want to point out here. first and foremost, if we do nothing, tax increases of about $400 billion, there are going to be spending reductions of about $102 billion, there are some other changes that happen at the end of the year that aren't associated with policy decisions, at the end of the day we change the scope of our deficit by about $607 billion. if we do nothing, that's what makes this such a hard issue to grapple with, mr. speaker, if we do nothing, if we reach no agreement, changes that happen automatically and burden us all in different ways, will create $607 billion for the u.s. treasury that we didn't have before. and that's only half of the annual deficit. you see all the pan damone yum that -- pandemonium folks are describing, all the frightful words used to describe the fiscal cliff, if we roll over that fiscal cliff and all of those bad things come to bear, the tax
given us his balanced plan to allegedly avoid the fiscal cliff. he wants to raise taxes by $1.6 trillion. he wants another stimulus package of $50 billion. he wants the authority to raise the debt ceiling without asking congress for approval. say it isn't so, mr. speaker. this tax hike will hurt small businesses which provide 67% of the jobs in this country. that may fund the government for a short time. then, what's the plan? stimulus 2.0. because the first stimulus worked so well? that was a disaster as well. we have a $16 trillion deficit, and the president wants to spend more money. are you kidding me? spending is the problem. we don't need more of it. lastly, he wants the power to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval. the administration cannot issue an edict like a money monarchy. congress, congress, congress is in control of the purse. we have gone wild and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. quigley: i ask unanimous consent to address the house
to avoid the fiscal cliff. but republican house speaker john boehner dismisses it as, and i'm quoting, la la land. the republicans offered their proposal, that happened about 24 hours ago. the white house quickly labels it as nothing new. business as usual, right? so how do we move beyond this stalemate in washington? we heard from the president, just a short time ago. our chief white house correspondent jessica yellin joins me now, jessica, the president spoke out, sat down in an interview with bloomberg tv, and in listening to the interview, did you hear any clues toward a possible compromise here? >> reporter: not new clues, brooke. the president laid down the marker that we heard from the white house consistently, which is they aren't moving until they hear the republicans agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest. listen to what the president had to say. >> i think that, you know, we have the potential of getting a deal done, but it is going to require what i talked about during the campaign, which is a balanced responsible approach to deficit reduction that can help give businesses
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)